That still makes Guards shit against Infantry, which was the point of making this change
Agreed, and that's why you have the DP upgrade which could be cheaper by the way.
PTRS now OP?
6 Apr 2015, 08:26 AM
#421
Posts: 2396 | Subs: 1
Agreed, and that's why you have the DP upgrade which could be cheaper by the way.
BeefSurge wrote:
A lot of people have an image of how they want a faction to play, leading to problems. This is why you have people complaining about lack of Soviet bunkers, why T34/76 sucks, why Cons don't scale, Grens don't get normal grenades, Muricans don't get heavy tank, OKW laser weapons and Die Glock Death Bell, etc.
A lot of people have an image of how they want a faction to play, leading to problems. This is why you have people complaining about lack of Soviet bunkers, why T34/76 sucks, why Cons don't scale, Grens don't get normal grenades, Muricans don't get heavy tank, OKW laser weapons and Die Glock Death Bell, etc.
6 Apr 2015, 09:32 AM
#422
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
Agreed, and that's why you have the DP upgrade which could be cheaper by the way.
DPs are still shit and guards would still lose to grens.
Maybe it's 'cause the Axis players aren't a bunch of forum crybabies, and they keep their cool and fight the uphill battle, unlike some of their "allied" counterparts.
6 Apr 2015, 09:47 AM
#423
Posts: 2396 | Subs: 1
DPs are still shit and guards would still lose to grens.
That's mainly because of rifle nades. The Guards squad's profile is strange because their weapons (including DP upgrade) are theoretically for long range. They have a hand grenade though. On the other hand all grens' weapons are for long range - including the rifle nade.
I think that the problem rely mainly in guards' unit profile contradiction. But ostheer lacks in elite infantry call-ins so you cannot blame grens for being able to compete or beating guards.
BeefSurge wrote:
A lot of people have an image of how they want a faction to play, leading to problems. This is why you have people complaining about lack of Soviet bunkers, why T34/76 sucks, why Cons don't scale, Grens don't get normal grenades, Muricans don't get heavy tank, OKW laser weapons and Die Glock Death Bell, etc.
A lot of people have an image of how they want a faction to play, leading to problems. This is why you have people complaining about lack of Soviet bunkers, why T34/76 sucks, why Cons don't scale, Grens don't get normal grenades, Muricans don't get heavy tank, OKW laser weapons and Die Glock Death Bell, etc.
6 Apr 2015, 11:00 AM
#424
Posts: 542
That's mainly because of rifle nades. The Guards squad's profile is strange because their weapons (including DP upgrade) are theoretically for long range. They have a hand grenade though. On the other hand all grens' weapons are for long range - including the rifle nade.
I think that the problem rely mainly in guards' unit profile contradiction. But ostheer lacks in elite infantry call-ins so you cannot blame grens for being able to compete or beating guards.
Well Obersoldaten also have close range grenades when they are equiped for long range. Of course unless you upgrade to the rarely used Stg44.
6 Apr 2015, 11:08 AM
#425
Posts: 2693 | Subs: 1
Well Obersoldaten also have close range grenades when they are equiped for long range. Of course unless you upgrade to the rarely used Stg44.
The difference is that Obersoldaten are so good at long range with just their LMG that enemy units will need to ambush and close in in order to stand a chance (exluding LMG paras and now guards). Their grenades are therefore pretty useful, both the exploding one and the slowing smoke grenade. With pre-patch guards it was a different story. They were long range troops, but with such poor DPS, the enemy didn't need to close in; making the grenade pretty useless unless you were going to close in yourself, which in turn made the the guards lackluster DPS even lower because only 2 models could fire on the move.
6 Apr 2015, 11:09 AM
#426
Posts: 1144 | Subs: 7
,
You are wrong. guards with PTRS/lmg beats Ober with lmg head on. That should not be like that and it is fair enough considering their price difference, time they arrive, and teching Obers require and guards not.
it would be really great if you would stop spreading misinformation. i did a several rounds of tests using cheat mod to test how obers perform against ptrs/dp guards.
tests were performed over open ground with fighting taking place at long range
vet 0 no lmg34 obers vs vet 0 ptrs guards no dp = RNG toss up on the last ober model and guards model
vet 0 lmg34 obers vs vet 0 ptrs guards no dp = obers ALWAYS win with minimal casualties (1)
vet 0 lmg34 obers vs vet 0 ptrs guards w/ dp = obers ALWAYS win with minimal casualties (1)
vet 2 lmg34 obers vs vet 3 ptrs guards w/ dp = obers win ALMOST ALWAYS with 2-3 model casualties
vet 5 lmg34 obers vs 2 vet 3 ptrs guards w/ dp = obers always win with 1-2 model casualties thanks to suppression.
the only situation where guards win is where they have significantly higher vet AND the dp28 upgrades.
6 Apr 2015, 11:38 AM
#427
Posts: 1802 | Subs: 1
PTRS was mistakenly changed because it doesn't serve its purpose now.
Fix:
Step one - reset PTRS to initial prepatch values
Step two - increse PTRS penetration value
Step 3 - Done.
Then Guards will be crappy peashooters again. I think only a weapon profile can fix this. Guards are kinda OK now, and they pay off their price by being a jack of all trades. A different PTRS profile for Cons with crappy pre-patch accuracy-or even worse-and maybe better ROF will fix thinks up IMO.
6 Apr 2015, 11:44 AM
#428
Posts: 1144 | Subs: 7
just for the record the PTRS was changed to make it more effective vs infantry
6 Apr 2015, 11:54 AM
#429
Posts: 959
it would be really great if you would stop spreading misinformation. i did a several rounds of tests using cheat mod to test how obers perform against ptrs/dp guards.
tests were performed over open ground with fighting taking place at long range
vet 0 no lmg34 obers vs vet 0 ptrs guards no dp = RNG toss up on the last ober model and guards model
vet 0 lmg34 obers vs vet 0 ptrs guards no dp = obers ALWAYS win with minimal casualties (1)
vet 0 lmg34 obers vs vet 0 ptrs guards w/ dp = obers ALWAYS win with minimal casualties (1)
vet 2 lmg34 obers vs vet 3 ptrs guards w/ dp = obers win ALMOST ALWAYS with 2-3 model casualties
vet 5 lmg34 obers vs 2 vet 3 ptrs guards w/ dp = obers always win with 1-2 model casualties thanks to suppression.
the only situation where guards win is where they have significantly higher vet AND the dp28 upgrades.
Calm down dude! They do, and I am talking about fresh vet 0 guys.
The problem is their ptrs works similar to snipers and ur obers start to get low health and models quickly. Not sure if u really tested it but I certainly did and still
Have the videos. I even recorded the videos of the scenario to send to the game developers about how they messed the game. Take it easy
6 Apr 2015, 11:55 AM
#430
Posts: 627
just for the record the PTRS was changed to make it more effective vs infantry
People still seem to have problems reading the patch notes and understanding this.
As if somehow the accuracy buffs were so it could hit vehicles, as if it was missing them consistently before.
6 Apr 2015, 12:33 PM
#431
Posts: 1144 | Subs: 7
Calm down dude! They do, and I am talking about fresh vet 0 guys.
The problem is their ptrs works similar to snipers and ur obers start to get low health and models quickly. Not sure if u really tested it but I certainly did and still
Have the videos. I even recorded the videos of the scenario to send to the game developers about how they messed the game. Take it easy
i actually did tests
6 Apr 2015, 12:54 PM
#432
Posts: 1439
The PTRS does 40 damage, the Gren Kar does 16 damage.
Why don't you compare the rate of fore as well?
6 Apr 2015, 13:01 PM
#433
Posts: 2396 | Subs: 1
just for the record the PTRS was changed to make it more effective vs infantry
...which... is wrong in my opinion and exactly this is the problem. It needs to be more effective against vehicles, not infantry. And such a change (penetration buff) won't make guards crapy again. It will just improve their performances against vehicles and even medium tanks which will be ok and needed. Let's put it this way: how would you feel about changing schrecks in the same manner? To be quite good vs infantry?
BeefSurge wrote:
A lot of people have an image of how they want a faction to play, leading to problems. This is why you have people complaining about lack of Soviet bunkers, why T34/76 sucks, why Cons don't scale, Grens don't get normal grenades, Muricans don't get heavy tank, OKW laser weapons and Die Glock Death Bell, etc.
A lot of people have an image of how they want a faction to play, leading to problems. This is why you have people complaining about lack of Soviet bunkers, why T34/76 sucks, why Cons don't scale, Grens don't get normal grenades, Muricans don't get heavy tank, OKW laser weapons and Die Glock Death Bell, etc.
6 Apr 2015, 13:11 PM
#434
Posts: 627
...which... is wrong in my opinion and exactly this is the problem. It needs to be more effective against vehicles, not infantry. And such a change (penetration buff) won't make guards crapy again. It will just improve their performances against vehicles and even medium tanks which will be ok and needed. Let's put it this way: how would you feel about changing schrecks in the same manner? To be quite good vs infantry?
If you also reduced shreck damage to 40, dropped its penetration to struggle against anything bigger than an armoured care and removed its ability to snap fire if pre-loaded?
Yeah, I'd be fine with that, OKW would be vulnerable to medium tanks again.
Even with substantially better penetration the PTRS wouldn't be a potent AT weapon. Long ready aim time, very low DPS, and if you gave it enough pen to be worth anything it'd be comically over penetrating compared to real equivalents.
It's a large calibre rifle, not an RPG. Its ability to hit infantry was a requirement to make guards worth their investment cost as the soviet elite ranged infantry (and not a completely useless piniata), a unit they were sorely lacking, and its ability to blow away light cover is a nice addition from both a historical and gameplay perspective.
6 Apr 2015, 13:15 PM
#435
Posts: 1144 | Subs: 7
...which... is wrong in my opinion and exactly this is the problem. It needs to be more effective against vehicles, not infantry. And such a change (penetration buff) won't make guards crapy again. It will just improve their performances against vehicles and even medium tanks which will be ok and needed. Let's put it this way: how would you feel about changing schrecks in the same manner? To be quite good vs infantry?
i think it is fine having a dual role of AT and AI. it is the weakest infantry AT weapon and definitely needs some flavor to keep it interesting/competitive. the panzershrek has the pros of being the highest damage and best penetration, but the downside of it being not very useful vs infantry and having a long reload. bazookas have mediocre damage and pen, but they do have fast reloads compared to the shrek. the ptrs has the lowest damage and pen, yet is also effective vs infantry.
in addition, i like the fact that guards are somewhat a threat now. before they were very squishy squads with really really limited AI that would even lose to lmg grens. now they have respectable damage output to reflect their 'elite' status, while still being a squishy 6 man squad. its also nice for soviets to have a decent long range infantry squad.
6 Apr 2015, 13:23 PM
#436
Posts: 2396 | Subs: 1
in addition, i like the fact that guards are somewhat a threat now.
Nothing wrong about this, but something with that PTRS cons blob is definetly wrong....
BeefSurge wrote:
A lot of people have an image of how they want a faction to play, leading to problems. This is why you have people complaining about lack of Soviet bunkers, why T34/76 sucks, why Cons don't scale, Grens don't get normal grenades, Muricans don't get heavy tank, OKW laser weapons and Die Glock Death Bell, etc.
A lot of people have an image of how they want a faction to play, leading to problems. This is why you have people complaining about lack of Soviet bunkers, why T34/76 sucks, why Cons don't scale, Grens don't get normal grenades, Muricans don't get heavy tank, OKW laser weapons and Die Glock Death Bell, etc.
6 Apr 2015, 13:25 PM
#437
Posts: 1144 | Subs: 7
Nothing wrong about this, but something with that PTRS cons blob is definetly wrong....
the problem with cons blob is that theres always 8 or so cons running around all over the map, and each of them has 2 ptrs' that have the stats meant for elite infantry. as others have mentioned, a new weapon profile for the cons ptrs that has less accuracy than the guards one and changing of target priorities is enough imo.
6 Apr 2015, 13:26 PM
#438
Posts: 2693 | Subs: 1
...which... is wrong in my opinion and exactly this is the problem. It needs to be more effective against vehicles, not infantry. And such a change (penetration buff) won't make guards crapy again. It will just improve their performances against vehicles and even medium tanks which will be ok and needed. Let's put it this way: how would you feel about changing schrecks in the same manner? To be quite good vs infantry?
Why is it wrong?
The PTRS is an anti-tank rifle that can also be used with reasonable success vs infantry. The panzerschrek on the other hand fires a shaped charge that is simply not that effective vs infantry.
I don't see why this fact can't be represented in-game. Sure, the PTRS is over-performing, but that is not because the concept is wrong; it's because the numbers need to be tweeked.
6 Apr 2015, 13:31 PM
#439
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
the problem with cons blob is that theres always 8 or so cons running around all over the map, and each of them has 2 ptrs' that have the stats meant for elite infantry. as others have mentioned, a new weapon profile for the cons ptrs that has less accuracy than the guards one and changing of target priorities is enough imo.
For the X time, its meant for every PTRS using unit, partisans included.
Cynthia put an explanation on official forum forwarded from design team in one of the threads-every single PTRS unit is supposed to benefit equally from the change, Guards were mentioned, because they were the most underperforming ones and not really having anything with elite infantry in common except for name.
Maybe it's 'cause the Axis players aren't a bunch of forum crybabies, and they keep their cool and fight the uphill battle, unlike some of their "allied" counterparts.
6 Apr 2015, 13:32 PM
#440
Posts: 122 | Subs: 2
In this thread:
1. People who don't play the game and think PTRS are OP
2. People who have played the game and moved on with their lives, because PTRS is fine.
1. People who don't play the game and think PTRS are OP
2. People who have played the game and moved on with their lives, because PTRS is fine.
2 users are browsing this thread:
2 guests
Livestreams
 |
|
|
43 | ||
 |
|
|
5 | ||
 |
|
|
28 | ||
 |
|
|
24 | ||
|
|
|
|
19 | ||
|
|
|
|
8 | ||
 |
|
|
3 | ||
|
|
|
|
2 | ||
|
|
|
|
1 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.831222.789+37
- 2.35057.860+15
- 3.1110614.644+11
- 4.624225.735+2
- 5.276108.719+27
- 6.306114.729+2
- 7.919405.694+3
- 8.262137.657+3
- 9.722440.621+4
- 10.1041674.607-2
Data provided by
Relic Entertainment
Relic Entertainment
Replay highlight
VS
-
cblanco ★ -
보드카 중대
-
VonManteuffel -
Heartless Jäger
Einhoven Country
Honor it
9
Download
1236
Board Info
736 users are online:
736 guests
0 post in the last 24h
5 posts in the last week
33 posts in the last month
5 posts in the last week
33 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49152
Welcome our newest member, Cummings
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM
Welcome our newest member, Cummings
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM